More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
The first dysfunction is an absence of trust among team members. Essentially, this stems from their unwillingness to be vulnerable within the group. Team members who are not genuinely open with one another about their mistakes and weaknesses make it impossible to build a foundation for trust.
This failure to build trust is damaging because it sets the tone for the second dysfunction: fear of conflict. Teams that lack trust are incapable of engaging in unfiltered and passionate debate of ideas. Instead, they resort to veiled discussions and guarded comments.
A lack of healthy conflict is a problem because it ensures the third dysfunction of a team: lack of commitment. Without having aired their opinions in the course of passionate and open debate, team members rarely, if ever, buy in and commi...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Because of this lack of real commitment and buy-in, team members develop an avoidance of accountability, the fourth dysfunction. Without committing to a clear plan of action, even ...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Failure to hold one another accountable creates an environment where the fifth dysfunction can thrive. Inattention to results occurs when team members put their individual needs (such as ego, career development, or recognition) or even the needs of their divisions above the collective goals of the team.
how members of truly cohesive teams behave: They trust one another. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas. They commit to decisions and plans of action. They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans. They focus on the achievement of collective results.
In the context of building a team, trust is the confidence among team members that their peers' intentions are good, and that there is no reason to be protective or careful around the group. In essence, teammates must get comfortable being vulnerable with one another.
This description stands in contrast to a more standard definition of trust, one that centers around the ability to predict a person's behavior based on past experience. For instance, one might “trust” that a given teammate will produce high-quality work because he has always done so in the past.
The vulnerabilities I'm referring to include weaknesses, skill deficiencies, interpersonal shortcomings, mistakes, and requests for help.
As a result, they can focus their energy and attention completely on the job at hand, rather than on being strategically disingenuous or political with one another.
Members of Teams with an Absence of Trust . . . Conceal their weaknesses and mistakes from one another Hesitate to ask for help or provide constructive feedback Hesitate to offer help outside their own areas of responsibility Jump to conclusions about the intentions and aptitudes of others without attempting to clarify them Fail to recognize and tap into one another's skills and experiences
Members of Trusting Teams . . . Admit weaknesses and mistakes Ask for help Accept questions and input about their areas of responsibility Give one another the benefit of the doubt before arriving at a negative conclusion Take risks in offering feedback and assistance
Personal Histories Exercise In less than an hour, a team can take the first steps toward developing trust.
Team Effectiveness Exercise This exercise is more rigorous and relevant than the previous one, but may involve more risk. It requires team members to identify the single most important contribution that each of their peers makes to the team, as well as the one area that they must either improve upon or eliminate for the good of the team. All members then report their responses, focusing on one person at a time, usually beginning with the team leader.
The profiling tool that I use is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). However, a number of other personality profiles are also popular, and one of the best and most common is Everything DiSC.
The most important action that a leader must take to encourage the building of trust on a team is to demonstrate vulnerability first. This requires that a leader risk losing face in front of the team, so that subordinates will take the same risk themselves.
By building trust, a team makes conflict possible because team members do not hesitate to engage in passionate and sometimes emotional debate, knowing that they will not be punished for saying something that might otherwise be interpreted as destructive or critical.
the higher you go up the management chain, the more you find people spending inordinate amounts of time and energy trying to avoid the kind of passionate debates that are essential to any great team.
When team members do not openly debate and disagree about important ideas, they often turn to back-channel personal attacks, which are far nastier and more harmful than any heated argument over issues.
healthy conflict is actually a time saver.
those that avoid conflict actually doom themselves to revisiting issues again and again without resolution.
Teams that Fear Conflict . . . Have boring meetings Create environments where back-channel politics and personal attacks thrive Ignore controversial topics that are critical to team success Fail to tap into all the opinions and perspectives of team members Waste time and energy with posturing and interpersonal risk management
Teams that Engage in Conflict . . . Have lively, interesting meetings Extract and exploit the ideas of all team members Solve real problems quickly Minimize politics
Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, commonly referred to as the TKI.
Dysfunction 3: Lack of Commitment In the context of a team, commitment is a function of two things: clarity and buy-in.
Consensus. Great teams understand the danger of seeking consensus, and find ways to achieve buy-in even when complete agreement is impossible.
understand that reasonable human beings do not need to get their way in order to support a decision, but only need to know that their opinions have been heard and considered.
The essence of this dysfunction is the unwillingness of team members to tolerate the interpersonal discomfort that accompanies calling a peer on his or her behavior and the more general tendency to avoid difficult conversations. Members of great teams overcome these natural inclinations, opting instead to “enter the danger” with one another.
As politically incorrect as it sounds, the most effective and efficient means of maintaining high standards of performance on a team is peer pressure.
Teams that are willing to commit publicly to specific results are more likely to work with a passionate, even desperate desire to achieve those results. Teams that say, “We'll do our best,” are subtly, if not purposefully, preparing themselves for failure.
A Note About Time: Kathryn's Methods
